When I received word that Federal Hill's Riverside's favorite neighborhood bar, Captain Larry's, had a form of nachos that incorporated my two favorite things - nachos and brunch - I Scooby Doo ran my way down there and immediately used my mouth muscles and tongue to order them.
The BRUNCHOS are $9 and come with tortilla chips topped with scrambled eggs, black beans, choice of bacon or chorizo, melted cheese, avocado & pico with sour cream & salsa.
Things that make this dish awesome to the max: firstly, the chips are well toasted. Secondly, the cheese, bacon and eggs are all layered together, which most other joints don't bother doing. Thirdly, there is a ton of bacon on them. Fourthly, the portion is huge and is best shared among friends.
Which actually brings me to an interestingly foodosophical topic: brunch is a meal that is rarely a shared event. More on that later. At any rate, brunchos are a great idea and they're different enough from chilequiles to warrant their own place in the annals of breakfast greatness. And the chunks of avocado are kickass.
(also they should make non-breakfast nachos, especially if they're this quality)
SO how exactly do I rate such a thing? Breakfast nachos? With a golden donkey, since they're so different? Or with the normal golden nachos? Guess what. They get both.
One golden donkey and four golden nachos out of .....5?